Yerel Fasulye Popülasyonlarından Seleksiyonla Geliştirilen İleri Hatların Besinsel ve Teknolojik Kalite Özelliklerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Aykut Şener

doi:10.24925/turjaf.v14i9.2654-2665.9161

Authors

Aykut Şener Isparta University of Applied Sciences, Faculty of Agriculture, Department of Field Crops, 32200, Isparta, Türkiye https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1868-9451

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.24925/turjaf.v14i9.2654-2665.9161

Keywords:

Bean, Lines, Quality, Correlation, Selection

Abstract

This study was conducted in 2021 and 2022 to determine the nutritional and technological quality traits of 22 advanced bean lines developed through selection from local bean populations and two control cultivars. The experiment was established in a randomized complete block design with three replications. Hundred-seed weight, protein content, oil content, water uptake capacity, water uptake index, seed coat ratio, swelling capacity, swelling index, and seed density were evaluated. The obtained data were subjected to analysis of variance, relationships among traits were assessed using Pearson’s correlation analysis, and the distribution of genotypes based on quality traits was investigated through principal component analysis (PCA). The results revealed that the effects of year, genotype, and year × genotype interaction were significant for all traits examined. Based on the two-year means, hundred-seed weight ranged from 20.96 to 48.95 g, protein content from 17.82 to 24.33%, oil content from 0.40 to 0.97%, water uptake capacity from 0.23 to 0.59 g seed^-1, water uptake index from 0.94 to 1.32, seed coat ratio from 6.94 to 10.08%, swelling capacity from 0.25 to 0.60 mL seed^-1, swelling index from 1.02 to 1.89, and seed density from 1.21 to 1.38 g mL^-1. Correlation analysis revealed strong positive relationships between hundred-seed weight and water uptake capacity (r = 0.92**) as well as swelling capacity (r = 0.84**), whereas a significant negative correlation was detected between protein and oil contents (r = −0.64**). PCA results showed that the first two principal components explained 68.41% of the total variation. PC1 was mainly associated with hundred-seed weight, water uptake capacity, and swelling capacity, whereas PC2 primarily reflected the contrasting contributions of protein and oil contents. Among the evaluated genotypes, KON5, ISP22, ISP21, ISP18, ISP31, and DEN2 were identified as the most promising lines in terms of quality traits. The results indicated that several advanced lines developed from local populations exhibited superior nutritional and technological quality characteristics and could be utilized as parental material in common bean breeding programs.

References

Akçin, A. (1974). Erzurum Şartlarında Yetiştirilen Kuru Fasulye Çeşitlerinde Gübreleme, Ekim Zamanı ve Sıra Aralığının Tane Verimine Etkisi ile Bu Çeşitlerin Bazı Fenolojik, Morfolojik ve Teknolojik Karakterleri Üzerine Bir Araştırma. Atatürk Üniversitesi Ziraat Fakültesi Yayınları, 157, 1-112, Erzurum.

AlBallat, I. A., & Abd Raboh, F. F. (2020). Effect of variety on soaking and cooking quality of common bean. East African Scholars Journal of Agriculture and Life Sciences, 3(1), 10-36349. https://doi.org/10.36349/EASJALS.2020.v03i01.001

Basavaraja, T., Manjunatha, L., Chandora, R., Gurumurthy, S., & Singh, N. P. (2021). Assessment of Genetic Variability, Diversity and Trait Correlation Analysis in Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Genotypes. Legume Research: An International Journal, 44(3). https://doi.org/10.18805/LR-4208

Bonassi, G., & Lavelli, V. (2024). Hydration and fortification of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) with grape skin phenolics—effects of ultrasound application and heating. Antiox. 13, 615. https://doi.org/10.3390/antiox13050615

Bozoğlu, H. & Sözen, Ö. (2007). Some Agronomic Properties of The Population of Local Common Bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Collected from Artvin Province. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 31(5), 327-334.

Bremner, J.M. (1965). Total Nitrogen Ed. (Black, C.A.) Methods of Soil Analysis Part 2, American Society of Agronomy Inc. Publisher Madison, 1149-1178.

Celmeli, T., Sari, H., Canci, H., Sari, D., Adak, A., Eker, T., & Toker, C. (2018). The nutritional content of common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) landraces in comparison to modern varieties. Agronomy, 8(9), 166. https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy8090166

Chhetri, A. B., Lal, J. P., Nair, R. M., & Singh, A. K. (2025). Genetic diversity for pod and seed traits in common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.). Discover Plants, 2(1), 228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44372-025-00316-y

Muroki, M. W., Waswa, L. M., Fungo, R., Kabwama, A., & Mahungu, S. M. (2023). Cooking properties and nutrient retention of biofortified common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris) varieties: The case of Burundi. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, 1062978. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1062978

Murube, E., Beleggia, R., Pacetti, D., Nartea, A., Frascarelli, G., Lanzavecchia, G., ... & Papa, R. (2021). Characterization of nutritional quality traits of a common bean germplasm collection. Foods, 10(7), 1572. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10071572

Özaktan, H., Erol, O., Uzun, S., & Uzun, O. (2025). Assessment of mineral contents and technological properties of dry bean genotypes grown under organic farming conditions with multivariate analysis. Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 31(1), 12-21. https://doi.org/10.15832/ankutbd.1444522

Parker, T. A., & Gepts, P. (2021). Population genomics of Phaseolus spp.: A domestication hotspot. In Population genomics: Crop plants (pp. 607-689). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/13836_2021_89

Ribeiro, N. D., dos Santos, G. G., Maziero, S. M., & dos Santos, G. G. (2021). Genetic diversity and selection of bean landraces and cultivars based on technological and nutritional traits. Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 96, 103721. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2020.103721

Rodríguez Madrera, R., Campa Negrillo, A., & Ferreira Fernández, J. J. (2024). Modulation of the nutritional and functional values of common bean by farming system: organic vs. conventional. Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7, 1282427. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2023.1282427

Saha, S., Singh, G., Mahajan, V., & Gupta, H. S. (2009). Variability of nutritional and cooking quality in bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L) as a function of genotype. Plant foods for human nutrition, 64(2), 174-180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11130-009-0121-4

Şener, A. (2021). Farklı İllerden Toplanan Yerel Fasulye (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) Popülasyonlarının Bazı Fizyolojik, Morfolojik, Agronomik ve Teknolojik Özellikler Yönünden Karakterizasyonu. [Doctoral dissertation , Isparta Uygulamalı Bilimler Üniversitesi, Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü]

Şener, A., & Kaya, M. (2022). Performance of local bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) genotypes for agronomic and technological characteristics. Yuzuncu Yıl University Journal of Agricultural Sciences, 32(4), 692-704. https://doi.org/10.29133/yyutbd.1122258

Shimelis, E. A., & Rakshit, S. K. (2005). Proximate composition and physico-chemical properties of improved dry bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) varieties grown in Ethiopia. LWT-Food Science and Technology, 38(4), 331-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lwt.2004.07.002

Siddiq, M., & Uebersax, M. A. (Eds.). (2022). Dry beans and pulses: Production, processing, and nutrition (2nd ed.). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119776802

Syed, M., Sofim, P. A., Khan, N., Sofi, N. R., & Dar, Z. A. (2012). Genetic diversity, variability and character association in local common bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) germplasm of Kashmir. Electronic Journal of Plant Breeding, 3(3), 883-891.

Wani, I. A., Sogi, D. S., Wani, A. A., & Gill, B. S. (2017). Physical and cooking characteristics of some Indian kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) cultivars. Journal of the Saudi Society of Agricultural Sciences, 16(1), 7-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jssas.2014.12.002

Williams, P.C., EL-Haramein, F.J., Nakkoul, H. & Rihavi, S. (1986). Crop Quality Evalution Methods and Guidelines. Icarda, p.142, Alepro, Syria.